2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Caste is a deeply entrenched social hierarchy in South Asia that continues to influence educational and career opportunities even in transnational contexts such as the United States. However, caste often becomes invisible through the discourse of caste-blindness, where individuals, particularly those from dominant caste backgrounds, frame caste as irrelevant or obsolete. This study employs critical discourse analysis (CDA) to examine how caste-blindness is enacted and sustained through the narrative of Rahul, an upper-caste Indian graduate student in the U.S. STEM education sector. This research analyzes how Rahul speaks about issues of educational and career equity in both South Asia and the U.S., and how his discourse reflects and enacts caste blindness.
Findings reveal three key themes: (1) Caste as an Obsolete Construct, where Rahul frames caste as a relic of the past, geographically confined to India, and irrelevant to his transnational educational and professional experiences; (2) Meritocracy and the Denial of Structural Inequalities, where Rahul's discourse aligns with the abstract liberalism tenet of caste-blind racism, emphasizing individual effort while overlooking the systemic advantages conferred by caste privilege; and (3) Transnational Adaptation of Caste Privilege, which highlights how caste hierarchies persist in diaspora communities through social networks and cultural capital, even as they are denied in public discourse. Rahul's statements, such as “caste doesn’t matter here” and “it’s just a name tag,” reflect a pattern of discourse that perpetuates caste privilege while erasing systemic inequities.
Through the application of Bonilla-Silva’s color-blind racism framework to caste, this study highlights how Rahul’s discourse contributes to the minimization of caste-based discrimination and the reinforcement of meritocratic ideals that obscure structural disparities. His framing of affirmative action policies as counterproductive and his perception of his own success as solely merit-based reflect a broader socio-cultural narrative that marginalizes oppressed caste individuals and their struggles.
The implications of this study are both theoretical and methodological. Theoretically, it contributes to the understanding of caste as a transnational phenomenon that adapts and persists across borders while remaining invisible to those who benefit from it. Methodologically, the use of CDA offers a nuanced approach to analyzing how language perpetuates caste privilege and reinforces social hierarchies in new contexts. The findings call for greater institutional awareness of caste-based inequities in U.S. higher education and professional spaces, urging stakeholders to acknowledge and address caste discrimination through policy interventions and discourse changes.
In conclusion, Rahul’s narrative serves as a microcosm of broader caste-blind discourses that sustain privilege while denying systemic oppression. The study underscores the urgent need to challenge caste-blind narratives and create more inclusive spaces for marginalized voices within transnational educational and professional environments. By shedding light on how caste operates subtly through discourse, this research contributes to the broader conversation on equity and social justice in globalized academic and professional spaces.